TJC has no desire to make the Firmware or the IDE open source, therefore Itead Studios is unable.

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

Mangy Dog

So what happened? I figured you was going to respond since you was the one an askin'

"The community" is not necessarily prevented from improving an IDE, it would require persons of skill as the source is not going to be simple handed to you. If such a "community" existed, they could in theory still build a truly immensely powerful IDE. But amongst those asking for Open Source, there are also those tire kickers and code grabbers that contribute no lines to the code base and merely sniff around for scraps. So, this is your interview.

M

Mangy Dog

said
12 months ago

Wow, wish i never asked now. Because i certainly didnt expect such an arsey response.

I dont hang around here waiting just for you to reply and to respond to you right away.

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

I think that is why the forum forwards it to our emails (so we don't have to wait around the board).

Anyrate, you are probably welcome to ask the other OpenSource IDE project (Google for it) - I believe they are working with the pre version 32 code base. Interviews don't take long, see - so no need to worry about hanging around the board waiting for responses.

M

Mangy Dog

said
12 months ago

Sorry are you trying to be rude or is english not your first language?

1 person likes this

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

I believe the word might be direct (and possibly missing some grammar in the rush).

See historically, there was a demand for Open Source and that fell on deaf ears at that time.

There was an Open Source IDE project started (possibly even with version 20 or 26 code base)

So I think this was about 10 months since there was any activity there - 5 members.

I would question how much community there is vs single user inquiry

Some users have created and contributed utilities.

If you went through and read all the requests, there are more tire kickers than contributors.

Itead Studios and TJC consider their Nextion display close source.

They are not handing out any code.

Recently I pushed for Itead Studio to reconcider the Open Source (possible RTOS version)

I gave you the link that Itead is monitoring to see if they will green light the Open Source.

If you read the linked thread above - you would see there is limited current support for Open Source.

I responded to your comment for Open Source IDE about three months faster than Itead staff

We were of course curious with new inquiries

All code we currently have has been through hard work - not handed to us from TJC

I invited you to engage - perhaps you wished to be considered for the team.

You withdrew your interest "wish I never asked now"

And "arsey" - maybe not such a good fit

Since you could wait three months for Itead staff to come by and with answers or to assist,

I answer much more quickly and help people get their projects off the ground when they get stuck

rude? no - probably earned arrogance, may be more exacting.

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

I found the link to the other OpenSource IDE project I mentioned earlier: HMI tool thread (ver 30).

Though it stalled ... many updates and formatting changes since ver 31.

So, curiously ... there are Open Source projects and yet a very long time between lines of code.

I think I was pointing out truths with little sugar coating.

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

Mangy Dog,

They have been doing some thinking.

We see that one of two possibilities exist for someone who responds with "arsey" for an interview.

- maybe - it could have been either arrogance from a proven super performer,

- or it could been a hot air, like a bluff made by someone who doesn't know much.

Simply put, to create an Open Source Editor for there to be such a code base - one would not only need to know the internal structures and inner workings of the Nextion (or be able to figure it out). As mentioned previously - they aren't handing out code, it is earned. But most importantly, they would have to be able to produce the compatible code to make it work with the existing, so that user hmi designs would still remain functioning and not break while enhancing on what exists.

With out the skills to produce, such an Open Source Editor is never realized. If it is never realized, then it merely becomes one more empty "why not give us your code as Open Source" (code grabbers). If the skills are not there to produce - the result is no lines added to the code base. There is no incentive to yield the source for Open Source as no code - no additional sales, huh.

If the skills are there to produce, then it is a time consuming responsibility to see it through to completion.

As you look through the forum, you will find plenty of users who wish it be completed - they would be happy when it gets done - you would be doing it for them. Usually nearly thankless and certainly not doing it for the money. There are certainly plenty that will make complaints about that which they know little or nothing about - that is part of the job as well.

So consider that the rest of the team (and possibly the many users looking forward to this vapourware) have a curiosity if arsey was used in the former, or not. If you can show that you can understand the design and replicate the output, you may be given an unsung, ungrateful opportunity to prove it. But they are still kind of curious to know either way.

M

Mangy Dog

said
12 months ago

Right, so english isnt your first language. Nothing wrong with that, but you are still rude.

I simply asked that itead made it open source. you could have replied and simply said.

"Itead doesnt want to make it open source, but we are trying to show support for an open source project.

But no you turned it into a arrogant rant about tire kickers and code stealers... You probably are an amazing coder but that doesn't give you the right to be a dick.

And as for an interview? I don't want to be interviewed. Im not applying for a position on the team.

I simply asked that Itead make the code open, they make their money off the hardware, not the software. The software is an expense because they have their own dev team working on something thats not going to bring in any revenue. So it makes sense to make the software open. This would speed up development on the IDE and allow itead to save money by just focusing on the hardware.

Now Im not a high level programmer, I'm a hobbies that understands a few languages and I have a decent understanding on how things work.

But heres what I know about the display.

its a STM arm chip, the board itself isnt anything special it has the spi touch screen chip and a 32 meg flash chip, that did surprise me i thought it was 4mb.

As the chip is 32 meg its fair to assume the OS they built is probably stored on there too, at least in part.

Now im not skilled enough, but I do know you can read the flash and copy it, as well as the stms internal flash. And then theyre are processes to decompile the code into c++. Sure you wont have any understandable variable names and you'll have to learn how it all works... But that IS possible.

Now Im not saying thats what you I or anyone here should do, that brakes IP laws and such. But China is a big place and many people there dont care about IPs.

Itead should at least consider building a comprehensive API, allow c++ coding on the ide.........

oh whatever, I wouldn't want to be on a team with some one as arrogant and some one with a superiority complex such as yourself.

1 person likes this

M

Mangy Dog

said
12 months ago

My bad, 32Mb not 32MB just rechecked the datasheet

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

A rant? LOL. You really do misunderstand, but you made me chuckle.

You make it sound as if people stand around with banners chanting to garner support for "Open Source". But the reality to realize open source is far different - work long and hard for no pay to make something far superior to what exists ... and then give it away for free to ungrateful people, to those who make no effort because they grow up feeling entitled. That is not a rant, that is the reality of how open source comes into being - it doesn't code itself. And it takes something special for that to happen, the members have to willing and able to commit their time to it - just to see the world may be a better place for a few.

It is okay, such a task it isn't for everyone. No law says anyone must do so. The link is a month old, before Jerry told me to get the firmware done. Superiority complex? May be it could be viewed like that. But more accurately as liaison to the decision maker, and so the one with the responsibility and the one put in charge. It shouldn't be a surprise to interview the ones asking for the open source, to see if they wanted to do the work - it would have been pointless to ask the ones struggling with their Arduino code.

No harm, no foul.

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

I will help you understand the landscape - Itead does not have the development team, the software is created by the much larger Chinese company TJC. TJC sells to mainland China with their software configured for the gb2312 character set, and Itead is the outlet for International with ascii / iso-8859.

A point of interest on IP and the physical hardware. There probably would be an IP issue if your purpose was to create a competing knock off. But one has to consider what was settled in the Microsoft anti-trust suit, where regardless of the "operating system" and desire to control the ecosystem of such - the owner of the hardware has every right to install the operating system or application software the owner deems fit. If they are selling a hardware system, this they cannot prevent - but it makes no obligation to assist.

So it is on that basis that allows you to pick up one of the existing Open Source projects and carry the ball a bit farther, or - to create your own from scratch.

But you have a misconception

"they make their money off the hardware, not the software. The software is an expense because they have their own dev team working on something thats not going to bring in any revenue."

There's an English word "synergy" where the value bundled together is greater than the sum of the parts. It is here that one would have to argue that their pricing reflects the nature of this synergy, for the price is definitively higher than the hardware by itself, and without the software there wouldn't be such high sales. Who would purposely chose this configuration of hardwired components without that software. Or at the price that they are currently asking without the software. If they were to remove their software, they definitively would not have near the sales for their hardware configured in this fashion. The software therefore is not the expense you think, but rather the investment that drives their revenues - with their sales increasing significantly with every new software enhancement.

the board itself isnt anything special

Hardware wise, you are probably indeed correct. Depending on what model you have. The basic series has a $1.30 4MB Winbond W25Q128 SPI Flash chip wired to work on the same IO lines as a $0.40 micro SD socket, a $3.00 STM32F030C8T6 MCU, $6 for the TFT screen, another $1 or $2 for the touch sensor, a connector with a 3.3V regulator and some caps and resistors sprinkled around here and there. The upper scale enhanced series uses a similar GD32F103 MCU from GigaDevices, maybe a buffer for RGB data on the larger screen, an RTC clock, a 1K EEPROM and allows 8 MCU lines to the outer edge.

And yet if the hardware itself was the big bread winner - we wouldn't be having this conversation. You would have merely flashed your STM32 MCU and thought nothing of it. No posts. So why didn't you?

Could it be that the actual magic happens in the arrangement of the instructions called "the software"? That without that arrangement having been done already for you, you would stare at a bricked device and call the "nothing special hardware" a pile of crap. It is an easy enough experiment to do, just take 100 empty devices, no firmware and no Nextion Editor and see if you get higher orders with or without the software. This method is good enough to establish value in a court, it should be good enough for users to understand that the software is not some expense dragging the company into the ground.

Now add up all the (IDK ~90+ developers) pay made with real currency, all the time invested to create this software, and give it some multiple for their future prospects based on their current growth. It certainly has a value. Somehow, you expect them to give all their hard work away for free.

But there is a path to Open Source. As you stated to "allow the community to build a truly immensely powerful IDE that would throw all the competition out of the water". Just that it requires said community to put in all those hours of time and hard work ... and give that result (your hard work) away for free. Then you could have that truly immensely powerful IDE you spoke about.

I am finished trying to sell Open Source, after all - wasn't it you that was pitching it to begin with.

P

Patrick Martin

said
12 months ago

This is how an Open Source IDE would come to realization - by creating it. ... and then give it away.

Patrick Martin

said
11 months ago

I am now reviewing all of the Feature Requests, this will take some time, patience please.

Although this wasn't a real feature request, it is now marked as reviewed.